There came a time during the Assembly Judiciary Committee’s hearing Monday when Las Vegas Republican Michele Fiore wondered — out loud — why it was that county sheriffs weren’t arresting federal law enforcement officers (she called them “thugs”) for impersonating police officers.

After Steven Horsford’s surprising loss to Republican Cresent Hardy last year, the ousted Democratic representative said he would go on a listening tour to find out why 4th Congressional District voters decided they wanted change.

What more can be said?

I found myself without words today to describe the horrific tragedy in Connecticut. What words are there, when 26 people lay dead, and 20 of them are children? Unlike me, President Barack Obama did not have the option of silence, and his eloquent, heartfelt words must be enough for this tragic day.

18 Responses to “What more can be said?”

The continual attacks on our public schools, school teachers, and children will have it’s effects on weak teaparty type minds.

Norway – gunman killed labour party young people

Tuscon – an anti-government (hated the government according to people who knew him) shot a Congresswomen he referred to as a “b—” more anti women thinking (remember “women sluts wanting free birth control”)

Aurora (someone jazzed by the pro-right wing batman theme)

Mix hateful comments about “young skulls full of mush” anti-public school rhetoric, Obama hate, teabagism, and FOX/talk radio hate with gun nuts and you get Newtown.

So how many of you will start fighting these kinds of shootings in order to protect yourself and your kids? How many of you will support your elected representatives if they vote for a law requiring background checks for purchasing a gun at a gun show? It would be a start. Are you for this basic first step to protect us and our kids?

Mom and son = doomsday preppers with the obligatory guns, 10 mm Glock hand cannon, saiga Russian street sweeper shotgun, and .223 Bushmaster, plus a Sig 9 mm… This is a very well thought out home arsenal, home was “a fortress” as well.

The computers were set on Drudge, Breitbart and WND. The TV tuned to FOX and the radio set on Hannity and Limbaugh. We know this was another crime by right wingers against a familiar target of their vebal and violent attacks: public schools.

Jerry, I would support that along with allowing those teachers and administrators who have passed the necessary background checks and required training to acquire a concealed carry permit to carry their weapons on the school grounds where they work.

It is reported the Principle of Sandy Hook was shot to death by Lanza while trying to overtake him. It is also reported Lanza shot himself when he heard police arriving. These two things add up to the conclusion Lanza would have been stopped far sooner if a gun was in the hands of the good people we already trust implicitly with the most precious members of society, children. How much sooner would Lanza have been stopped? How many of those people would remain among the living right now?

We will never know.

But we do know he killed himself as soon as he found himself presented with the possibility of being shot.

England went for a long time without guns. Even the police didn’t carry them. Now look. It’s time to end our Second Amendment. I have been in the military, I’ve been a policeman, I have a concealed weapon permit and I’ve carried a firearm for 40-years. I am now willing to give up my guns and rescind the Second Amendment to our Constitution. The gun nuts in our country won’t even discuss something as simple as having background checks at gun shows; much less restrict the size and scope of firearms. It’s time to pick them all up. All of them. I’m willing to allow police to be the only people allowed to be armed and give them the power to stop and search anybody at any time; and to get warrants to search any home. I want the penalty of owning or carrying a weapon to be life in prison. The time has come.

The Connecticut shootings changes nothing about the gun control debate. That statement may be seen as unfeeling given the age of the victims or the enormity of the crime, but if we take a look at facts, we find that there is no overwhelming argument in this case that fundamentally changes the debate.

Despite Jerry Sturdivant’s calls for background checks at gun shows, there is nothing to suggest that the guns used in this shooting were obtained at a gun show, and they were most certainly not obtained by the shooter himself. Instead they belonged to the shooter’s mother who ostensibly would have passed such checks, having no criminal background or mental illness, so Jerry’s “basic first step” would have prevented nothing in this case.

The police simply will never arrive in time to prevent any sort of crime. They cannot, because until the crime is in progress, it isn’t a crime, and once it is in progress, someone has to contact them and they have to respond. All of this takes time and during that time, the crime proceeds. Citizens/victims are the first responders in all crimes and how they respond typically determines the outcome of the crime. The principal in Connecticut responded with all of the tools at her disposal which were effectively none, her action may have delayed the shooter buying someone time to escape, or perhaps not. The janitor alerted classrooms, but was not equipped to do anything further. Teachers reacted by huddling in corners with the kids in their care or racing them to the nearest exit. They all did whatever they could with the tools at their disposal while waiting for police, but the police simply could not arrive quickly enough to prevent any of what happened.

None of the above is new. Police have never been able to respond faster than they do today, and despite the investments in surveillance and weapons detectors, killers still kill. The only true protection is matching training and armament with the killers at the time of the crime. How’s this for a radical idea, if a school is supposed to protect our children, then offer the workers at the school the training and equipment necessary to do so. It doesn’t take police, it takes ordinary people as in these stories: http://bit.ly/WcgbuO and http://bit.ly/UEZ2UB There are, of course many more stories like this, but they don’t make national headlines.

It’s not about ‘this case,’ Jeff; it’s about having the ability to obtain an assault weapon; a number of 30 bullet clips and armor-piercing bullets. If all this guy could have obtained was a bolt action rifle with a 3-bullet clip; far fewer children would have been killed by the time the police arrived and the killer stopped killing kids and killed himself. Same with the shooter of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords; he stopped to reload and was prevented from killing more. If this was all any future nut was able to obtain; far fewer lives could be lost in the future. They might not even try ‘setting a record,’ and not shoot at all. That’s what this Assault Weapons Ban is all about. Are you against background checks? Are you against people being able to obtain 50-caliber fully automatic machine guns? Why? The why is the point.

Jerry, I’ve read reports that the Bushmaster was left in his car http://lat.ms/Xozjku and I’ve read reports that he used it in the assault http://bit.ly/Wtaf0B , Neither I, nor you, know the truth of this at this point, but let’s assume for the moment that he did. Lacking the Bushmaster, the other firearms used were still capable of doing the damage that he did primarily because nobody else on the premises of the school was armed, therefore nobody would have been able to stop him until someone who was aremd (the police in this case) showed up. Why are you so against allowing teachers and other school staff to have the tools and trainig appropriate to defend themselves and the children we leave in their care in such situations if they so desire?

Jerry, your original post only called for background checks at gun shows and I addressed such checks, that they wouldn’t have had any impact in this case. Your more recent post now calls for an assault weapon ban, what’s next, a handgun ban, perhaps a ban on large knives such as were used on the same day in China http://bit.ly/UpXIEV ? Perhaps a ban on repeating crossbows? Of course criminals ignore such bans it is only the law-abiding that follow them, so again I ask, why are you opposed to law-abiding people defending themselves?

Look, Jerry, anyone who has read your posts knows your positions and knows that no amount of rational arguments will change them. You aren’t interested in any information that might change your mind because your viewpoint is locked in. That’s fine and it is your right, but it doesn’t really add anything new to the debate.

Well I’m flattered that you couldn’t address the message and felt you had to attack the messenger, again. But all that searching the internet for me didn’t do you much good. (You’ll note in another section of the on-line RJ, another poster posted one of the places I was a law officer); but you’re wrong, once again. I was a deputy Sheriff in two different states. How embarrassing for you. Now all you’re left with is, once again, dodging that question: “Why are you still protecting the Gun Show Loop Hole and the purchase of assault weapons with large clips and armor-piercing bullets?” You can add your apology to your answer.

So The Journal News Paper in New York filed freedom of information requests for all the permitted gun owners. This paper then compiled all the names and addresses of the legal gun owners and published it in map form online. Anyone in New York can find the name and address of a gun owner and I believe this is a great tool. Any criminal now only has to wait for the gun owner to leave home, steal the gun and use it to home invade a neighbor that does not have registered weapon! Good job NY!

I feel that it is scary that while I work in school a guy can run in the room and shoot at everyone. Schools should have officers inspecting everyone coming on campus. If that proves successful nobody will be harmed. The schools will be safer and no-one will worry about being shot.